Brian Atkins writes:
> Eugene this is going nowhere for one reason: look around at the real world
> (as you love to point out)- there are no Turing Police out there, and I
> don't see any developing. I don't know why we are wasting our time debating
Perhaps there should be one.
> this, since your wishes for temporary relinquishment will not come to pass
> (at least in the AI area) IMO. Or are you planning to start your own org
I agree this was a bit too verbose, but at least for me the debate was
fruitful. The logics of it all drove me to adopt a position I formerly
wouldn't dream to hold. Strange, strange world.
> politicking for these measures and controls?
No, I'm more interested in nanotechnology, specifically molecular
circuitry. I'm no good at politics, and I don't see the threat to
become relevant before two to three decades have passed. If my mental
facilities are then still sufficient, we will see then.
Meanwhile, I would ask of you and Eliezer to reevaluate your project,
specifically reassessing that what you're trying to build is indeed
that what you will wind up with, especially if you decide to use
evolutionary algorithms as part of the seed technology.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:14 MDT